pith. sign in

arxiv: 2410.18049 · v2 · submitted 2024-10-23 · 🧮 math.QA · math-ph· math.CT· math.GT· math.MP

A geometrical description of untwisted 3d Dijkgraaf-Witten TQFT with defects

Jo\~ao Faria Martins , Catherine Meusburger This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-23 18:53 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🧮 math.QA math-phmath.CTmath.GTmath.MP
keywords Dijkgraaf-Witten theorytopological quantum field theorydefectsgroupoidsstratified cobordismsquantum double modelhomotopy methodsgauge theory
0
0 comments X

The pith

Untwisted 3d Dijkgraaf-Witten theory with defects of all codimensions arises as a symmetric monoidal functor from a stratified cobordism category to vector spaces via groupoids and bundles.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper gives an explicit geometric construction of the 3d untwisted Dijkgraaf-Witten TQFT that incorporates defects in every codimension. It defines this theory as a symmetric monoidal functor whose objects are oriented stratified surfaces labeled by higher categorical data and whose morphisms are equivalence classes of stratified cobordisms. The functor is built directly from fundamental groupoids and bundles: each defect surface receives a representation of a gauge groupoid, and each cobordism receives a fibrant span of groupoids together with an intertwiner. The resulting assignment yields a TQFT without any triangulation-based state sums or diagrammatic higher-category calculus, and the 2d sector reproduces defects in Kitaev's quantum double model.

Core claim

The 3d untwisted Dijkgraaf-Witten theory with defects is given as a symmetric monoidal functor from a defect cobordism category into the category of finite-dimensional complex vector spaces, constructed in terms of geometric quantities such as fundamental groupoids and bundles. It is obtained from a functor that assigns to each defect surface a representation of a gauge groupoid and to each defect cobordism a fibrant span of groupoids and an intertwiner between the groupoid representations at its boundary.

What carries the argument

The symmetric monoidal functor from the defect cobordism category to finite-dimensional vector spaces, realized by assigning gauge-groupoid representations to stratified surfaces and fibrant spans of groupoids to cobordisms.

If this is right

  • The two-dimensional sector supplies an explicit geometric description of all-codimension defects in Kitaev's quantum double model.
  • Partition functions and state spaces for any stratified 3-manifold with defects are obtained by direct evaluation of groupoid representations and spans.
  • The construction works uniformly for defects in every codimension because the input data are stratified surfaces and cobordisms.
  • All examples become computable by standard homotopy-theoretic operations on fundamental groupoids and bundles.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same groupoid-span assignment could be tested on other 3d gauge theories to see whether it reproduces known invariants without state sums.
  • Stratified cobordism categories with this labeling might admit a direct comparison with existing defect TQFTs defined by different methods.
  • Because the 2d restriction matches the quantum double model, one could check whether higher-dimensional extensions produce consistent anyon braiding data.

Load-bearing premise

The homotopy-theoretic assignment of representations of gauge groupoids to defect surfaces and fibrant spans to stratified cobordisms defines a valid TQFT functor for all codimensions without additional state-sum or diagrammatic structures.

What would settle it

An explicit computation, for a concrete closed 3-manifold containing a labeled defect surface, of the dimension of the associated vector space that differs from the value obtained by any triangulation-based state sum for the same defect data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2410.18049 by Catherine Meusburger, Jo\~ao Faria Martins.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Neighbourhoods of k-strata in a stratified n-manifold for k < n. The maps ιk : S ∂X k → S X k+1 from (11) are induced by the inclusion ι : R 2 → R 3 , (x1, x2) 7→ (x1, x2, 0). Note that boundary k-strata of a stratified n-manifold X are not k-strata of X. In fact, they are associated with (k + 1)-strata of X. The homogeneity condition implies that for each boundary k-stratum s ∈ S ∂X k there is a unique (k… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Thickening Mth of a stratified 3-manifold M with vertices u, v, w, edges d, e, f and a plane p. 3.3 Graded graphs from stratifications A compact stratified n-manifold X defines a graded graph. Its vertices are the strata of X, and the degree of a k-stratum s is deg(s) = codim(s) = n − k. Edges starting at a k-stratum s are local (k + 1)-strata q : s → t at s and connect s to the (k + 1)-stratum t. The norm… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Labelling the edges of the thickening Xth with elements of the groups GL(p) , GR(p) and the GL(p) × G op R(p) -set Mp. The labels are related by the conditions: mv = gd ▷ mw ◁ h −1 d , mw = gf ▷ mu ◁ h −1 f , mv = ge ▷ mu ◁ h −1 f , ge = gd · gf , he = hd · hf . For boundary edges and edges of a surface Σ it is arbitrary. All red edges are oriented by the normals. s(e) t(e) e l(e) ⊂ L(s) r(e) ⊂ R(s) (s, l)… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Action of a gauge transformation for green planes in the thickening of an edge [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p038_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Separating curve e on a surface Σ with Σ \ e = Ω1 ⨿ Ω2 and a vertex v on e. • a gauge configuration by group homomorphisms ρi : π1(Ωi , v) → Gi and ms, mt ∈ M such that mt = ρ1(e) ▷ ms ◁ ρ2(e) −1 , (75) • a gauge transformation by a pair (g1, g2) ∈ G1 × G2 acting on a gauge configuration as ρi 7→ gi · ρi · g −1 i , ms 7→ g1 ▷ ms ◁ g −1 2 , mt 7→ g1 ▷ mt ◁ g −1 2 . (76) As mt is determined by ms and ρ1, ρ2 … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We give a simple, geometric and explicit construction of 3d untwisted Dijkgraaf-Witten theory with defects of all codimensions. It is given as a symmetric monoidal functor from a defect cobordism category into the category of finite-dimensional complex vector spaces. The objects of this category are oriented stratified surfaces and its morphisms are equivalence classes of stratified cobordisms, both labelled with higher categorical data. This TQFT is constructed in terms of geometric quantities such as fundamental groupoids and bundles and requires neither state sums on triangulations nor diagrammatic calculi for higher categories. It is obtained from a functor that assigns to each defect surface a representation of a gauge groupoid and to each defect cobordism a fibrant span of groupoids and an intertwiner between the groupoid representations at its boundary. It is constructed by homotopy theoretic methods and allows for an explicit computation of examples. In particular, we show how the 2d part of this defect TQFT gives a simple description of defects of all codimensions in Kitaev's quantum double model.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper claims to construct the untwisted 3d Dijkgraaf-Witten TQFT with defects of all codimensions as a symmetric monoidal functor from a defect cobordism category (objects are oriented stratified surfaces labeled with higher categorical data; morphisms are equivalence classes of stratified cobordisms) to finite-dimensional complex vector spaces. The construction assigns representations of gauge groupoids to defect surfaces and fibrant spans of groupoids plus intertwiners to stratified cobordisms, using fundamental groupoids and bundles via homotopy-theoretic methods, without state sums or diagrammatics; it is illustrated by an explicit description of defects in Kitaev's quantum double model.

Significance. If verified, the result supplies an explicit geometric construction of defect TQFTs that is independent of triangulations and diagrammatic calculi, enabling direct computations from groupoid data and strengthening connections between homotopy methods and condensed-matter models such as the quantum double.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract and the construction paragraph: the central claim that the assignment of representations and fibrant spans 'defines a symmetric monoidal functor' is load-bearing, yet the text provides no explicit verification that span composition in the homotopy category coincides with stratified cobordism composition for every codimension (0-3) or that the resulting maps are independent of choices of representatives.
  2. [Abstract] The 2d-part claim (final sentence of abstract): while the paper states that the construction gives a simple description of defects in Kitaev's model, the absence of a check that monoidality under disjoint union is preserved by the groupoid data for all defect types leaves the functoriality assertion unconfirmed in the provided description.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their careful reading and constructive comments. The points raised concern the explicitness of certain verifications in the presentation of the functoriality. We address each major comment below and indicate the revisions we will make.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract and the construction paragraph: the central claim that the assignment of representations and fibrant spans 'defines a symmetric monoidal functor' is load-bearing, yet the text provides no explicit verification that span composition in the homotopy category coincides with stratified cobordism composition for every codimension (0-3) or that the resulting maps are independent of choices of representatives.

    Authors: The construction proceeds by first assigning to each stratified surface its fundamental groupoid (with defects encoded as additional data on the strata) and then taking representations of the resulting gauge groupoid; cobordisms are sent to fibrant spans whose legs are the boundary groupoids. Composition of spans in the homotopy category is defined via homotopy pullbacks, which by construction correspond to the gluing of stratified cobordisms along their common boundary strata. Independence of representatives follows from the fact that the equivalence relation on cobordisms is generated by stratified diffeomorphisms and that fibrant spans are stable under homotopy equivalences. While these identifications are used throughout Sections 3 and 4, we agree that a single, codimension-by-codimension verification paragraph is not isolated in the current text. We will insert a new subsection (provisionally 4.3) that spells out the matching of compositions and the independence for codimensions 0 through 3. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The 2d-part claim (final sentence of abstract): while the paper states that the construction gives a simple description of defects in Kitaev's model, the absence of a check that monoidality under disjoint union is preserved by the groupoid data for all defect types leaves the functoriality assertion unconfirmed in the provided description.

    Authors: The gauge groupoid of a disjoint union of defect surfaces is the coproduct of the individual gauge groupoids in the category of groupoids; the representation functor then sends this coproduct to the tensor product of the corresponding representation spaces, which is the monoidal structure on Vect. This holds uniformly for all defect types because the defect data (labels on strata) enter only as additional objects or morphisms in the groupoid and do not alter the coproduct structure. The Kitaev-model section already uses this fact implicitly when describing multiple defects. Nevertheless, to make the monoidality check fully explicit for every defect type, we will add a short paragraph immediately after the Kitaev example that records the preservation of disjoint union under the groupoid assignment. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: geometric functor construction is self-contained

full rationale

The paper presents an explicit construction of the defect TQFT as a symmetric monoidal functor via assignments of representations of gauge groupoids to defect surfaces and fibrant spans plus intertwiners to stratified cobordisms, using standard homotopy-theoretic methods on fundamental groupoids and bundles. No steps reduce by definition, fitted parameters renamed as predictions, or load-bearing self-citations; the derivation relies on independent geometric and categorical structures without self-referential inputs or ansatzes smuggled via prior work. The central claim is a direct construction, not a prediction forced by its own data.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The construction rests on standard structures from category theory and homotopy theory with no free parameters or new entities introduced.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Symmetric monoidal structure on the category of finite-dimensional vector spaces and on the defect cobordism category
    Invoked to define the TQFT as a symmetric monoidal functor.
  • domain assumption Existence and functoriality of fundamental groupoids and principal bundles for oriented stratified surfaces and cobordisms
    Central to the geometric assignment of representations and spans.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5740 in / 1253 out tokens · 43406 ms · 2026-05-23T18:53:16.590217+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 65 canonical work pages · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    R., & Hsiang, W

    Anderson, D. R., & Hsiang, W. C. (1980). Extending combinatorial piecewise linear structures on stratified spaces. II. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 260(1), 223-253

    work page 1980

  2. [2]

    Ayala, D., Francis, J., & Tanaka, H. L. (2017). Factorization homology of stratified spaces. Selecta Mathematica, 23(1), 293-362

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    Homotopy (Co)limits via Homotopy (Co)ends in General Combinatorial Model Categories, Appl

    Arkhipov S, and rsted S. Homotopy (Co)limits via Homotopy (Co)ends in General Combinatorial Model Categories, Appl. Categ. Struct. 31, No. 6, Paper No. 47, 10 p

    work page

  4. [4]

    C., Hoffnung, A

    Baez, J. C., Hoffnung, A. E., & Walker, C. D. (2010). Higher dimensional algebra. VII: Groupoidification. Theory and Applications of Categories, 24(18), 489-553

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    Balsam, B., & Kirillov Jr, A. (2010). Turaev-Viro invariants as an extended TQFT. arXiv preprint arXiv:1004.1533

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  6. [6]

    Balsam, B., & Kirillov Jr, A. (2012). Kitaev's lattice model and Turaev-Viro TQFTs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1206.2308

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    W., Meusburger, C., & Schaumann, G.(2024)

    Barrett, J. W., Meusburger, C., & Schaumann, G.(2024). Gray categories with duals and their diagrams. Advances in Mathematics, 450, 109740

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Barrett, J., & Westbury, B. (1996). Invariants of piecewise-linear 3-manifolds. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 348(10), 3997-4022

    work page 1996

  9. [9]

    3rd revised, updated and extended ed

    Brown R (2006), Topology and groupoids. 3rd revised, updated and extended ed. Bangor

    work page 2006

  10. [10]

    (2009) Algebraic colimit calculations in homotopy theory using fibred and cofibred categories

    Brown, R., Sivera, R. (2009) Algebraic colimit calculations in homotopy theory using fibred and cofibred categories. Theory and Applications of Categories, Vol. 22, No. 8, 2009, pp. 222–251

    work page 2009

  11. [11]

    Carqueville, N., Meusburger, C., & Schaumann, G. (2020). 3-dimensional defect TQFTs and their tricategories. Advances in Mathematics, 364, 107024

    work page 2020

  12. [12]

    Carqueville, N., Runkel, I., & Schaumann, G. (2018). Line and surface defects in Reshetikhin-Turaev TQFT. Quantum Topology, 10(3), 399-439

    work page 2018

  13. [13]

    Carqueville, N., Runkel, I., & Schaumann, G. (2019). Orbifolds of n -dimensional defect TQFTs. Geometry & Topology, 23(2), 781-864

    work page 2019

  14. [14]

    Carqueville, N., Runkel, I., & Schaumann, G. (2020). Orbifolds of Reshetikhin-Turaev TQFTs. Theory and Applications of Categories, 35(15), 513-561

    work page 2020

  15. [15]

    Carqueville, N., Mulevi c ius, V., Runkel, I., Schaumann, G., & Scherl, D. (2021). Orbifold graph TQFTs. arXiv preprint arXiv:2101.02482

    work page arXiv 2021

  16. [16]

    Carqueville, N., & M\"uller, L. (2023). Orbifold completion of 3-categories. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.06485

    work page arXiv 2023

  17. [17]

    Dijkgraaf, R., & Witten, E. (1990). Topological gauge theories and group cohomology. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 129(2), 393-429

    work page 1990

  18. [18]

    Etingof, P., Gelaki, S., Nikshych, D., & Ostrik, V. (2016). Tensor categories (Vol. 205). American Mathematical Soc

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    & Porter, T

    Faria Martins, J. & Porter, T. (2007). On Yetter's Invariant and an Extension of the Dijkgraaf-Witten Invariant to Categorical Groups. Theory and Applications of Categories, Vol. 18, 2007, No. 4, pp 118-150

    work page 2007

  20. [20]

    & Porter, T

    Faria Martins, J. & Porter, T. (2023). A categorification of Quinn's finite total homotopy TQFT with application to TQFTs and once-extended TQFTs derived from strict omega-groupoids. arXiv preprint arXiv:2301.02491

    work page arXiv 2023

  21. [21]

    Topological Quantum Field Theories from Compact Lie Groups

    Freed, D. S., Hopkins, M. J., Lurie, J., & Teleman, C. (2009). Topological quantum field theories from compact Lie groups. in P. R. Kotiuga (ed.) A celebration of the mathematical legacy of Raoul Bott, CRM Proc. Lecture Notes, vol. 50, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2010, pp. 367--403 (2010), arXiv preprint arXiv:0905.0731

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  22. [22]

    Topological symmetry in quantum field theory

    Freed, D. S., Moore, G. W., & Teleman, C. (2022). Topological symmetry in quantum field theory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2209.07471

    work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    S., & Quinn, F

    Freed, D. S., & Quinn, F. (1993). Chern-Simons theory with finite gauge group. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 156(3), 435-472

    work page 1993

  24. [24]

    Friedman, G. (2020). Singular intersection homology (Vol. 33). Cambridge University Press

    work page 2020

  25. [25]

    Fr\"ohlich, J., Fuchs, J., Runkel, I., & Schweigert, C. (2007). Duality and defects in rational conformal field theory. Nuclear Physics B, 763(3), 354-430

    work page 2007

  26. [26]

    Fuchs, J., Schaumann, G., & Schweigert, C. (2017). A trace for bimodule categories. Applied Categorical Structures, 25(2), 227-268

    work page 2017

  27. [27]

    Fuchs, J., Schweigert, C., & Valentino, A. (2013). Bicategories for boundary conditions and for surface defects in 3-d TFT. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 321, 543-575

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Fuchs, J., Schweigert, C., & Valentino, A. (2014). A geometric approach to boundaries and surface defects in Dijkgraaf-Witten theories. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 332, 981-1015

    work page 2014

  29. [29]

    Fuchs, J., Schweigert, C., Wood, S., & Yang, Y. (2023). Algebraic structures in two-dimensional conformal field theory. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.02773

    work page arXiv 2023

  30. [30]

    G\'alvez--Carrillo, I; Kock, J.; Tonks, A. (2018). Homotopy linear algebra. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb., Sect. A, Math. 148, No. 2, 293--325 (2018)

    work page 2018

  31. [31]

    Gould, M. D. (1993). Quantum double finite group algebras and their representations. Bulletin of the Australian Mathematical Society, 48(2), 275-301

    work page 1993

  32. [32]

    Haugseng, R. (2018). Iterated spans and classical topological field theories. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 289, 1427-1488

    work page 2018

  33. [33]

    S., Model categories and their localizations

    Hirschhorn P. S., Model categories and their localizations. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS) (2003)

    work page 2003

  34. [34]

    Hollander, S. (2008). A homotopy theory for stacks. Israel Journal of Mathematics, 163, 93-124

    work page 2008

  35. [35]

    Hovey, M. (2007). Model categories (No. 63). American Mathematical Soc

    work page 2007

  36. [36]

    Jordan, D., Le, I., Schrader, G., & Shapiro, A. (2021). Quantum decorated character stacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2102.12283

    work page arXiv 2021

  37. [37]

    Kapustin, A., & Saulina, N. (2011). Surface operators in 3d topological field theory and 2d rational conformal field theory. Mathematical foundations of quantum field theory and perturbative string theory, 83, 175-198

    work page 2011

  38. [38]

    Keller, C., & M\"uller, L. (2021). Finite symmetries of quantum character stacks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.12348

    work page arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    Kelly, G. M. (2005). Basic concepts of enriched category theory. Repr. Theory Appl. Categ. 2005, No. 10, 1-136 (2005)

    work page 2005

  40. [40]

    Kitaev, A. Y. (2003). Fault-tolerant quantum computation by anyons. Annals of Physics, 303(1), 2-30

    work page 2003

  41. [41]

    Kitaev, A., & Kong, L. (2012). Models for gapped boundaries and domain walls. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 313(2), 351-373

    work page 2012

  42. [42]

    Koppen, V., Mulevi c ius, V., Runkel, I., & Schweigert, C. (2022). Domain walls between 3d phases of Reshetikhin-Turaev TQFTs. Communications in Mathematical Physics, 396(3), 1187-1220

    work page 2022

  43. [43]

    A., & Wen, X

    Levin, M. A., & Wen, X. G. (2005). String-net condensation: A physical mechanism for topological phases. Physical Review B Condensed Matter and Materials Physics, 71(4), 045110

    work page 2005

  44. [44]

    at Erlangen-N\

    Lischka, F. (2021) Generalised 6j-symbols over the category of G -graded vector spaces, Master thesis, Friedrich-Alexander Universit\"at Erlangen-N\"urnberg. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.09055

    work page arXiv 2021

  45. [45]

    Loregian, F., & Riehl, E. (2020). Categorical notions of fibration. Expositiones Mathematicae, 38(4), 496-514

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press (2009)

    Lurie J., Higher topos theory. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press (2009)

    work page 2009

  47. [47]

    Mac Lane S., Categories for the working mathematician. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Springer (1998)

    work page 1998

  48. [48]

    Meusburger, C. (2023). State sum models with defects based on spherical fusion categories. Advances in Mathematics, 429, 109177

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    Morton, J. C. (2015). Cohomological twisting of 2-linearization and extended TQFT. Journal of Homotopy and Related Structures, 10(2), 127-187

    work page 2015

  50. [50]

    Perrone, P., & Tholen, W. (2022). Kan extensions are partial colimits. Applied Categorical Structures, 30(4), 685-753

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Quinn, F. (1995). Lectures on axiomatic topological quantum field theory. Geometry and quantum field theory (Park City, UT, 1991), 1, 323-453

    work page 1995

  52. [52]

    Reshetikhin, N., & Turaev, V. G. (1991). Invariants of 3-manifolds via link polynomials and quantum groups. Inventiones mathematicae, 103(1), 547-597

    work page 1991

  53. [53]

    Riehl, E. (2014). Categorical homotopy theory (Vol. 24). Cambridge University Press

    work page 2014

  54. [54]

    P., & Sanderson, B

    Rourke, C. P., & Sanderson, B. J. (2012). Introduction to piecewise-linear topology. Springer Science & Business Media

    work page 2012

  55. [55]

    Schaumann, G. (2013). Traces on module categories over fusion categories. Journal of Algebra, 379, 382-425

    work page 2013

  56. [56]

    Schaumann, G. (2015). Pivotal tricategories and a categorification of inner-product modules. Algebras and Representation Theory, 18(6), 1407-1479

    work page 2015

  57. [57]

    Siebenmann, L. C. (1972). Deformation of homeomorphisms on stratified sets. Commentarii Mathematici Helvetici, 47(1), 123-163

    work page 1972

  58. [58]

    Schweigert, C., & Woike, L. (2019). Orbifold construction for topological field theories. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 223(3), 1167-1192

    work page 2019

  59. [59]

    Schweigert, C., & Woike, L. (2017). A parallel section functor for 2-vector bundles. Theory and Applications of Categories, 33(23), 644-690

    work page 2017

  60. [60]

    Torzewska, F. (2024). Topological quantum field theories and homotopy cobordisms. Applied Categorical Structures, 32(4), 22

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    Trova, F. (2016). Nakayama categories and groupoid quantization. arXiv preprint arXiv:1602.01019

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  62. [62]

    G., & Viro, O

    Turaev, V. G., & Viro, O. Y. (1992). State sum invariants of 3-manifolds and quantum 6j-symbols. Topology, 31(4), 865-902

    work page 1992

  63. [63]

    Turaev, V.G.,& Virelizier, A. (2010). On two approaches to 3-dimensional TQFTs. arXiv preprint arXiv:1006.3501

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  64. [64]

    G., & Virelizier, A

    Turaev, V. G., & Virelizier, A. (2017). Monoidal categories and topological field theory (Vol. 322, pp. xii+-523). Basel: Birkh\"auser

    work page 2017

  65. [65]

    Willerton, S. (2008). The twisted Drinfeld double of a finite group via gerbes and finite groupoids. Algebraic & Geometric Topology, 8(3), 1419-1457

    work page 2008